Abatti v. Eldridge
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WIENER, J.
The question in this appeal is whether the court properly exercised its discretion in resolving competing creditors’ claims to an insufficient common fund. Or, phrased differently, if the court can’t increase the size of the pie, how should it cut the slices? We hold the court was correct in denying defendants’ motion to approve a settlement with plaintiffs where the settlement was an attempt to finesse the lien of a judgment creditor imposed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 688.1. In other words, where the pie is ample, equity requires that each creditor be given…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Carsten v. Psychology Examining CommitteeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
- Haskins v. JordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- McClearen v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Salaman v. BoltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Goodspeed v. Great Western Power Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Oldham v. California Capital Fund, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- Casa Eva I Homeowners Ass'n v. Ani Construction & Tile, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005